PS. In a bit, like the weather? The further from the present you go, the "harder" it gets to solve for that?
That said, when approaching (or, surpassing) some "imposibility boundary" - for more an more parts to actually exist, ultimately leading to the whole being impossible ...
... that's when it gets interesting.-
The thing with something like a phone is that it's so dependent on several different network effects that it's hard to put a real value on it in isolation. Of course, for an individual device, there's very much an upper limit. I suspect that a lot of people in 1970 would balk at the price of an iPhone but then they had other telecoms charges that would seem extortionate today.
And in 2024.
... per-minute voice, for example.-
It seems like a nitpick but the value proposition of the thing is very dependent on the ability of all those, I’m sure we all have some intuition of which ought to be included, but it might not match.
An iPhone with all those things would probably be extremely valuable I guess. Thousands of times faster than the fastest supercomputer and a bit easier to carry.
Mobile communications for the most part was very much a premium early adopter phenomenon for people who really needed it in some form and/or didn't much care about the cost. Satellite was like that and is only now slowly changing.
That question was asked and answered at the time. To store recipes on.
Once the PC arrived, though, the real drivers of sales were word processing and spreadsheets.
Was this a thing? (Recipe storage being the "killer app" ...)
You make an interesting distinction between perceived prospective use and actual use ...